Fill out the form below to post a message

[1800GAMBLER]

Party Poker (8 handed) pokerhand.org hand converter (http://www.pokerhand.org)

Preflop: Hero is BB with 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, J/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG limps, next 3 limp. all fold. i check.

Flop: 2/images/graemlins/spade.gif, J/images/graemlins/spade.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(5 players)</font>
Hero checks, UTG+1 bets $65. Folds. I call.

Alright, i checked to go for a checkraise or see what happens. In the end i decided to checkcall-lead friendly turn. I don't like this play, but lets move on, it happened.

Turn: Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
Pot: 225. I lead for pot. He just above min raises. I call.

Meh. I don't feel great right now but i can't pick out any certain hands that he could raise here, QJ seems most legit and maybe 99 but this raise also feels a lot like a pansy take a free showdown raise with something very possible like QK AQ QTs or even AA, i figure i could call with intentions of folding to a river bet and win at least 2:1 here, so i call.

River: 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

I check with intentions of calling since if i lead i'm getting no value from Q,x, only the same value against QJ and i'm worse off against 99.

Thoughts? Maybe i should stop putting myself in these situations?

[turnipmonster]

stack sizes?

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
stack sizes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Opps, shiit. Villian has $1400 left on the river, i have him covered.

[ML4L]

Hey Jay,

[ QUOTE ]

River: 2/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>

I check with intentions of calling since if i lead i'm getting no value from Q,x, only the same value against QJ and i'm worse off against 99.

[/ QUOTE ]

I lead the river. I think that he has a pansy showdown hand (or QJ) far more often than a bigger boat. I don't see why you think that a queen is folding that river to a bet; a lead looks like a busted flush draw...

I think that the more interesting question is how much to bet on the river...

Glad to see you posting again. Hope it worked out.

Mike

[etizzle]

I think you need to c/r all in here. The only hand that beats you is 99, and betting here may let him off the hook with KTs or T8s or QJ (and by off the hook i mean he wont raise it).

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
a lead looks like a busted flush draw...

[/ QUOTE ]

Always something to learn from these forums, dam i didn't even consider this /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Think the turn call is fine? Is it close?

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]

I think that the more interesting question is how much to bet on the river...

[/ QUOTE ]

I fancy a push.

edit: a push I think has two advantages. like mike said there's a good range bluffing hands you can have so you're getting pretty good snapoff equity from him, plus you don't let him call with worse hands and raise with better ones in a situation where you are committed. agree/disagree?

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think that the more interesting question is how much to bet on the river...

[/ QUOTE ]

I fancy a push.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you give thoughts, i'm wondering which hands you think i make more against with this line vs c/r all in.

Man, i hope you have all noticed how humble i am in this forum now, i finally passed puberty. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

edit:

[ QUOTE ]
edit: a push I think has two advantages. like mike said there's a good range bluffing hands you can have so you're getting pretty good snapoff equity from him

[/ QUOTE ]

While i didn't consider this in the hand right now it seems the only snap value i get is against QJ i don't think many if any players in here try to pick me off with QK no matter how much my hand is under respesented, and against QJ i think i'd prefer checkraise.

[ QUOTE ]
plus you don't let him call with worse hands and raise with better ones in a situation where you are committed. agree/disagree?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the advantage of push vs bet size. I think if we do lead it should be a push.

[etizzle]

yeah i'm not sure I understand either. I think any hand that calls a bet would bet it themselves. I can't see him calling this push with one pair hands.

[turnipmonster]

added thoughts above. this is 10/20?

[1800GAMBLER]

[ QUOTE ]
added thoughts above. this is 10/20?

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, ha, we edit too much. Yea 10/20 Party.

[ML4L]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think that the more interesting question is how much to bet on the river...

[/ QUOTE ]

I fancy a push.

edit: a push I think has two advantages. like mike said there's a good range bluffing hands you can have so you're getting pretty good snapoff equity from him, plus you don't let him call with worse hands and raise with better ones in a situation where you are committed. agree/disagree?

[/ QUOTE ]

This was my initial thought process as well, but I'm not sold on it. Not sure why; something just feels a little off.

Here is my take. We lose our whole stack when he has an overfull. But, that doesn't automatically mean that we should push. We bet whatever amount will maximize our profits. If we were hypothetically in a situation where he would call half-pot 100% of the time and all-in 20% of the time, we would bet half-pot, even though we know that we are losing all of our money most of the time that we are raised (we'll assume that we can't bet and fold to a raise because we will sometimes be raised by a worse hand, like maybe QJ here).

So, the fact that we are pot-stuck and paying off a raise does not mean that we should just push, in and of itself. It just means that, if we intend to bet less than all-in, we need to be ahead and get called a pretty high percentage of the time.

Back to this hand, I think that all-in might actually be the bet size that maximizes value, since he SHOULD call all-in with any hand that he would call less, given the way the hand played out. If we knew that the guy didn't have the balls to pick off a big "bluff," we might have to bet less, or even check and deal with the fact that he's going to check behind and our hand be good a big chunk of the time.

Does that make sense?

Mike

[turnipmonster]

if we can make the assumption that all hands he will bet here will also call a push, then all we need is a nonzero chance of QK/QT/AQ calling to snap us off to make more money, no? I agree it won't happen often, but it doesn't need to to make more than checking, provided my initial assumption is correct.

[turnipmonster]

[ QUOTE ]


Back to this hand, I think that all-in might actually be the bet size that maximizes value, since he SHOULD call all-in with any hand that he would call less, given the way the hand played out.


[/ QUOTE ]

agreed, had the flop played out a little differently I think a case could be made otherwise. but given the way it plays out jay's hand reeks of something fruity. the deuce is not "supposed" to have helped his hand, so why is he betting it?

I think villian can call lighter than you guys seem to think, so I could be wrong in my analysis.

[fsuplayer]

[ QUOTE ]

Would you give thoughts, i'm wondering which hands you think i make more against with this line vs c/r all in.

Man, i hope you have all noticed how humble i am in this forum now, i finally passed puberty. /images/graemlins/grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

yes, i have noticed, and I think your game, as well as anyone who reads your posts will benefit from this as well. your posts have been great lately.



btw, you played this just like a flush draw, that river card is picture perfect, i bet like 1200 here or push, which ever will look more like a bluff from your image.

[ML4L]

[ QUOTE ]

I think villian can call lighter than you guys seem to think, so I could be wrong in my analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I agree with you on that. You would think that a player at 10/20 would have the stones to call here with one pair if he thought Jay had a draw...

Mike

[coltrane]

[ QUOTE ]
If we were hypothetically in a situation where he would call half-pot 100% of the time and all-in 20% of the time, we would bet half-pot, even though we know that we are losing all of our money most of the time that we are raised

[/ QUOTE ]

this is a very important general concept IMO....I'm often in hands when on the river, I feel I'm committed and therefore think that the optimum value bet is all-in, but it's not always true for the above reason.....especially live, and especially if I haven't yet given the table a reason to think I'm making big moves, there's something about an "all-in" bet on the river that makes worse hands fold that would've called almost that same amount (even though it doesn't really make sense).......